Survival after Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer in Relation to Prior Non-Muscle Invasive Disease in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess if there is a difference in survival after radical cystectomy (RC) when examined in relation to prior non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) disease vs. invasive cancer de novo at time of diagnosis. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of all patients who underwent RC within Quebec health insurance medical services database during the years (2000-2009). Overall survival (OS) outcome was assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves and hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for age and gender. RESULTS: A total of 2,671 subjects met the eligibility criteria. Among them, 19.8% had presumed prior NMIBC that further progressed to invasive disease. Median survival after RC for patients with presumed prior NMIBC was 4.3 years as compared to patients with presumed invasive disease de novo 3.7 years (p = 0.007, Wilcoxon test). Patients with presumed NMIBC at the time of diagnosis had a 16% decrease in the risk of mortality after RC, when compared to patients with presumed invasive BC de novo (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.96 (p = 0.0166)). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest a slightly better prognosis, regarding OS after RC for patients with presumed NMIBC who progressed to invasive disease, when compared to patients with presumed invasive disease de novo at the time of diagnosis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".